Is Ghostwalk any good?

[carpedavid]

ah okay, I was wondering about this too. I guess it's DnD's version of Wraith.

Originally posted by Iron_Chef
If you'd stop trying to be flip for the sake of being flip, you'd see that this comparison is valid. Both Wraith and Ghostwalk are RPGs in which characters portray ghosts. Wraith does not sell as well as Vampire, Werewolf or most other WW "monster" games, so therefore ghosts are not as popular among gamers as a character choice.

Er... not really. I've played Wraith, and Ghostwalk really isn't anything like Wraith. First of all, there's no angst in Ghostwalk. In Wraith (at least when I played it) you're dead, you're going to stay dead, and you have to deal with it, so there - go and be angsty.

That's not the impression I got at all from reading through Ghostwalk. You're not a ghost in the traditional sense. You don't exist to right a wrong or avenge your death. You're just a spirit that hasn't made it to the afterlife yet. And you're not undead - that's important.

The impression that I get from Ghostwalk is actually the opposite as Wraith. Being a ghost is nifty and all, but the goal is to eventually get back to being living. In fact, the rules as they're written, prevent players from deliberately staying ghosts (once your levels in the eidolon class exceed your total levels in all of your other classes, you have become too ghosty, and get sucked back to the afterlife). It's more of a creative way to deal with PC death than saying, "we spend 500gp to ressurect him," and then moving on.

Would a book about playing vampires in D&D appeal to people? I'd imagine so - I'd probably buy it. That's a different case though, because you have to become a vampire through very specific methods. Anyone can become a ghost simply by dying (at least, a Ghostwalk version of a ghost) - it doesn't matter how. The included campaign setting gives a creative mechanism to make it work, but I don't think it's the main drive behind the book*.

Anyway, I wanted to clear up that misconception. It's not like Wraith in that it's not a book for people who want to play tortured spirits. As far as I can tell, it's a book to add some creativity to the subject of PC death.

*I'd be interested to find out from Monte and Sean whether the idea of playing ghosts came first or the idea for Manifest came first.

Edit: changed "playing" to "staying"

 

[Wolf72]

very cool!, thanks for clearing that up

 

[Aaron2]

Interview

My understanding is that the book was written in 2001 and shelved. WotC needed a filler book to put between 3.0 and 3.5 and went ahead and printed it.

Also, here's a quote from Sean Reynolds about how it started:

"The short concept we presented to Bill Slavicsek (head of RPGs) and Keith Strohm (D&D brand manager at the time) had a one-sentence summary for the book: "If your character dies, you can continue playing immediately as the ghost of your PC.""

Can anyone tell me the ratio of rules to setting?


Aaron (still interested although I blew my budget on other stuff today)

 

[MThibault]

I'm not afraid to call it as I see it, no matter how much some may choose to belittle me. Ghostwalk may (or may not) be wonderful and creative, but I fail to see how it will ever be a bestseller for WoTC. As a complete outsider, I predict it will do "okay" at best (by however WoTC defines that to be) and "poor" at worst (again by however WoTC defines that to be). I could be wrong, certainly, but more than likely, I am right, because everything I know (and my gut, always trust your gut instinct) tells me it will not be a bestseller.

Who cares if it will be a bestseller. I think the question was, "Is it any good?"

Cheers

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

Posted by Iron_Chef
Actually, it's not that little-known of a fact. Most gamers will see a horde of vampires before they see a single ghost in any given campaign. Vampires are more popular as villains and easier to run than the somewhat confusing "mix and match" ghost template.

Well, that sounds highly anecdotal. My players have seen loads of ghosts, and nary a vampire. Do you do market research for WOTC or another big RPG company? If you do, I think you should say so. If you don't, quit acting like you do.

Any moron knows that vampires will outsell ghosts 9 times out of 10 in any media (book, movie, TV, comic book, RPG, etc.).

I was intrigued by this statement, so here's some numbers, courtesy of IMDB.com:

Total # of ghost movies in the top 100 highest-grossing domestic films of all time: 4 (Sixth Sense #15, Ghostbusters #30, Ghost #37, What Lies Beneath #100)
Total # of vampire movies: 0

In fact, the only vampire movie to crack the $100,000,000 is Interview with the Vampire at #240. However, if we are broadening our search to anything that made over $100,000,000 then we should add The Ring, Ghostbusters II, Casper, and a case could be made for Blair Witch, Sleepy Hollow and Scooby Doo.

I would have to say that the cash bonanza yielded by ghost-themed films outstrips the comparatively meager successes of vampire-themed films, TV, books, etc. Over a billion dollars in domestic box office is hard to compete with.

 

[Iron_Chef]

Who cares if it will be a bestseller. I think the question was, "Is it any good?"

Cheers

That is indeed the question for fans: "Is it any good?"

For corporate execs, however, it's "Will it make us enough money to be worth doing?"

 

[SneakyB]

That is indeed the question for fans: "Is it any good?"

For corporate execs, however, it's "Will it make us enough money to be worth doing?"

Obviously that decision has been made as we are discussing a book that is in print. The operative question in this context is "Will the next 'Campaign Option' book make us enough money to do it again?"

IMO, the book is excellent and very much worth it the cost. However, YMMV, which is what the original poster was asking. Disscussing the merits of the book itself in this thread and the decisions made by the "management" of WotC is a side issue.

Dan

 

[Remathilis]

That is indeed the question for fans: "Is it any good?"

For corporate execs, however, it's "Will it make us enough money to be worth doing?"

So are you actually argueing against WotC doing something different as apposed to another class/race/deity/equipment/prc/feat/magic/forgotten realms book?

 

[Wormwood]

While I find the book interesting enough to consider as a campaign add-on, my players reacted with a resounding yawn.

I don't know if it's the concept or the execution that failed to impress, but in any event Ghostwalk won't be played 'round these parts any time soon.

Shame, really---it looked fairly interesting.

 

[carpedavid]

Re: Interview

Also, here's a quote from Sean Reynolds about how it started:

"The short concept we presented to Bill Slavicsek (head of RPGs) and Keith Strohm (D&D brand manager at the time) had a one-sentence summary for the book: "If your character dies, you can continue playing immediately as the ghost of your PC.""

Excellent. Thanks for that bit of info. That's what I thought, based on my readthrough.

Can anyone tell me the ratio of rules to setting?

Chapter 1: All About Ghosts - 73 pages
Chapter 2: The City of Manifest - 41 pages
Chapter 3: The Ghostwalk Campaign - 20 pages
Chapter 4: Countries - 22 pages
Chapter 5: Monsters - 18 pages
Chapter 6: Adventures - 47 pages

Chapters 1 & 5 are all rules, so 91 pages.
Chapters 2, 4, & 6 are all setting/adventure, so 110 pages.
Chapter 3 is half setting/half rules.

So the ratio of rules to setting is pretty close to 50/50.

Hope that helps!